Why Did Our Father Want Blood Sacrifices?

[Robinson Crusoe]

Ultimately though, this is about God's Justice. So whatever SATISFIES/PLEASES/GRATIFIES HIM is what is required for anyone of Faith to do.

You can question anything; why did God allow Sin in the first place. Why create so many people that God knows full well, will just live a short life, suffer, die, be Judged and then Burn In Hell. Why would a loving God do that!? Why, why, why!!! Ultimately, because it pleased Him to do it! People's view of pleasure today though, seems distorted. So, the word seems to have become twisted in their simple minds. PERHAPS, IT IS BECAUSE THEY SPEND TOO MUCH TIME IN THE GUTTER! Have you seen how Christians dress these days!

Perhaps it is because they are too lazy to use dictionaries and thesaurus.
Maybe it is the poor quality of public schools and universities. Maybe it is the wretched state of The Media. I don't know, but this isn't the first word in our language to be mutilated, in the past 60 years and it won't be the last.

 

[Robinson Crusoe]

I can't see selling God though. I mean, why would anybody buy it! If I was shopping for a deity, in my carnal nature, I would choose something that promised me prosperity, protection and the opportunity to do as many bad things as I could, with as few consequences as possible. In other words, I would want "it all." I don't think I am unique, in that regard

So, why choose God? Well, in the first case, because He appears to be real and The Bible appears to be His one true revelation, to Mankind. Second, because He is terrifying. Third, because I don't want to be an idiot. All of God's good qualities, I think, are reasons to be happy. They are not, I don't think, the reason I am a Christian.

People will claim, they would never submit to a God they thought might do this or do that, but that seems like horse manure to me. What I see people doing is following whatever is the strongest power they see/immediately effects them. Its qualities have nothing/very little to do with it. Look at college campuses. Students obey, because they want a degree; not because they believe in the bologna they get taught. They'll conform, because they want to fit in; not because they are in love with political correctness.

 

[0bed]

Because many people are turned off to God because of how they view Him in the Bible -as wrathful, mean, cruel, etc,---and
ask me many questions about all the contradictions found in the Bible ---help me with an answer about:

Why would a loving Father want blood from innocents? His little innocent creatures, lambs, His Son...?

Quoting the Bible doesn't count because they reject such "nonsense".
Their brains want to logically "get" ---W-H-Y?

Any help? If you say go to Hebrews 9 - it doesn't help them. It does not answer the question why?

Then, they don't want to believe in a God that would put His Son thru being a Blood Sacrifice.
Purposely, they reject the thought of such a Father as this.

What is in the mind of God that He likes lambs killed? Or does He? Is it a made up ritual of early Man's?
I need logic. Is there any?

Thanks,
:) Miss Hepburn

Hi, I am new here, may God's blessing be upon you all.

In Old Testament times human sacrifice was common whereas sacrificing a lamb (there were other sacrifices) was all the Israelites needed to do in order to show their love and to acknowledge him as God. That act of sacrifice and submission was sufficient.

Sacrificing a lamb is much better than sacrificing a child and the fact that is all the Israelites were required to do demonstrates God's care, mercy and love for his people. When we make a sacrifice of any sort for our children, friends or family we are in effect saying "look I don't matter, you are more important than me, you have it" and by doing that you are showing respect and love for the other person who in this case is God and we are saying and acknowledging that he is greater than ourselves, and as Christians we sacrifice our desires and lusts and we make Him pre-eminent in our lives. In effect we have sacrificed our sinful nature to him.

By killing the lamb the sacrifice is complete, it is total and there is no going back. Also a lamb was valuable, not only that it was the best lamb and so it was a real sacrificial offering, it was an act of giving something to the lord and it was a love offering.

People have spoken of a "type" and in the death of Christ we see the sacrifice of someone who was really precious in the sight of God, it was a precious sacrifice, his death meant there was no going back and it was total, and his sacrifice showed he thought we were more important than he was, so much so that he was prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice for us and I thank him for it and for the love it shows and if people think Jehovah is wrathful and vengeful, well believe you me he wasn't.

God bless.

 

[Miss Hepburn]

Hi Obed, welcome here and God Bless you, too. :)

A well written post.
But I would say we know all this already - the history of sacrifice and all, with respect.

Do you have any thoughts as to why our Creator would even want a death---to honor Him?
How does a killing show love? Why would a Father want this?
Did He want this?

Now, I don't think He did, now that I have taken on this subject for my atheist friend.
I now think it was a "man made up" ritual...that He simply let us do because we are so dumb and
don't really get this Universe and Him and what is really going on.

So, like a Dad that accepts a dirty, smudged birthday card from his 4 yr old - He takes it.
However, as I have found out since this subject opened from many verses noted in some of the above posts...
He never wanted burnt offerings -just our steadfast love and knowledge of Him.

My original question seems now to be a mission of showing that God indeed never wanted "blood" sacrifices.
Thus, maybe not Jesus' either.

I know it's radical. I know some here are flipping at those very words. So.
I'm after now in my life's search for better understanding
not age old concept's and intepretations and traditions ---but the reality.

I don't think the reality is that God, our Father cares in the least about animal or human sacrifices. Now He
does care about our intentions and our hearts, of course.

What do you think? Thanks :) Miss Hepburn

 

[HammerStone]

Do you have any thoughts as to why our Creator would even want a death---to honor Him?
How does a killing show love? Why would a Father want this?
Did He want this?

That's just it Miss Hepburn, I keep seeing you use the word want when verses like Hosea 6:6 show otherwise. There are things that are required - innocent blood to atone for sin - and then there are things that are wanted - our love as shown in Hosea 6:6.

I guess what I want to say is that understanding the answer to your question involves understanding the whole picture. So maybe instead of flipping to Genesis, flip to Revelation to help find the answer. Regardless of stance on prophecy, that is the end result of everything at the end of the Bible in Revelation? Is it not doing away with Satan and his elements to bring about a time of peace? Recall how Satan is bound a thousand years after his first trouble. He gets out and instead of turning a new leaf he simply does it again, this time for the last time. Our Father is very forgiving, but there is a point where one can go beyond God's grace because they are nothing but a curse on those around them. Satan is there and if Revelation is any indication, there will be others that follow him be they other fallen angels or souls.

This is the clue to what is at stake in this age. Drop back to Revelation 12. What did the great red dragon named Satan do? He grabs a third of the stars and casts them to Earth. Then he makes war in heaven. Destruction, destruction and still more destruction.

Then enters the katabole, spoken of elsewhere in the New Testament. It's rendered overthrow in the KJV, because it was associated with "throwing down" a foundation in the Greek. However, as the kata- root indicates there is more to the story:

http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2602

It is from http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2598 and http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=906

Look at from whence the word comes. You have kataballō which is to lay prostrate, throw down, place in a lower place and then you have ballō which means to literally put something where you don't really care where it goes.

The best analogy about this I can give you as a pallet of bricks as a house is built. The pallet arrives organized to a great degree. The builder then takes them down and arranges them in a new order for the foundation of a house. The individual bricks don't have a specific place to go, but they are put together so that they assemble a foundation. Think of it like that with God, but it was done in anger. It was a foundation, but a foundation that came about as a result of an overthrow. There was an order which Satan destroyed. God, as the builder, tore down what was and built the current foundation.

The reason that blood was necessary is because there are some serious sins that needed to be addressed. God tried creating a perfect world for man to prove himself (and herself), but that was quickly corrupted in the same pattern. The came the law, which was a shadow of the things to come but not yet appointed in his grand purpose. Man then managed to screw that up too. Again, I go back to what was said before. The offerings were never meant to be something that was performed without care. They should not be done because offering up an innocent animal for mistakes is not the ideal for a child of God.

 

[gregg]

Hi Obed, welcome here and God Bless you, too. :)

A well written post.
But I would say we know all this already - the history of sacrifice and all, with respect.

Do you have any thoughts as to why our Creator would even want a death---to honor Him?
How does a killing show love? Why would a Father want this?
Did He want this?

Now, I don't think He did, now that I have taken on this subject for my atheist friend.
I now think it was a "man made up" ritual...that He simply let us do because we are so dumb and
don't really get this Universe and Him and what is really going on.

So, like a Dad that accepts a dirty, smudged birthday card from his 4 yr old - He takes it.
However, as I have found out since this subject opened from many verses noted in some of the above posts...
He never wanted burnt offerings -just our steadfast love and knowledge of Him.

My original question seems now to be a mission of showing that God indeed never wanted "blood" sacrifices.
Thus, maybe not Jesus' either.

I know it's radical. I know some here are flipping at those very words. So.
I'm after now in my life's search for better understanding
not age old concept's and intepretations and traditions ---but the reality.

I don't think the reality is that God, our Father cares in the least about animal or human sacrifices. Now He
does care about our intentions and our hearts, of course.

What do you think? Thanks :) Miss Hepburn

miss h heres what i think. i think them two in the garden shed the first blood when they partook of the tree that had knowledge of good and evil,then they were cast out.(blood brought death and christ blood brought life) they both were good for food.The answer is in their act. what was the act that they did in disobedience? they ate. :blink:

 

[0bed]

Hi Obed, welcome here and God Bless you, too. :)

A well written post.
But I would say we know all this already - the history of sacrifice and all, with respect.

Do you have any thoughts as to why our Creator would even want a death---to honor Him?
How does a killing show love? Why would a Father want this?
Did He want this?

Now, I don't think He did, now that I have taken on this subject for my atheist friend.
I now think it was a "man made up" ritual...that He simply let us do because we are so dumb and
don't really get this Universe and Him and what is really going on.

So, like a Dad that accepts a dirty, smudged birthday card from his 4 yr old - He takes it.
However, as I have found out since this subject opened from many verses noted in some of the above posts...
He never wanted burnt offerings -just our steadfast love and knowledge of Him.

My original question seems now to be a mission of showing that God indeed never wanted "blood" sacrifices.
Thus, maybe not Jesus' either.

I know it's radical. I know some here are flipping at those very words. So.
I'm after now in my life's search for better understanding
not age old concept's and intepretations and traditions ---but the reality.

I don't think the reality is that God, our Father cares in the least about animal or human sacrifices. Now He
does care about our intentions and our hearts, of course.

What do you think? Thanks :) Miss Hepburn

It was symbolic like the bread and wine today that reminds us of Christ's death on the cross; so too the sacrificial lamb which represented the person making the sacrifice reminded people of the awful consequences of sin in their lives. In an agrarian society livestock was valuable and to all intents and purposes a fine had been paid and the death of the lamb represented their death, and their sins which were many were destroyed in the cleansing fire.

It is a fundamental law in the OT that the punishment must match the crime which means an eye for an eye etc. with capitol punishment being the ultimate penalty. Christ who was the sacrificial lamb paid the price for our sins, but Christ's sacrifice was for all eternity because he is eternal.

People today imagine all sorts of things and they need to realise that blood symbolises life and the shedding of blood represents death, but it was only symbolic and the reality is that it does not imply a bloodthirsty God and I think you missed the point I made that other cultures required human sacrifice while Judaism did NOT require any such thing.

 

[Butch5]

This is getting repeptitive.


You want to read about "Penal" vs. "Governmental" and rehash The Reformation, then read this, if you don't care, then just read The Bible and celebrate The Eucharist, somewhere

http://www.theopedia.com/Penal_substitutionary_atonement

My friend I don't hold to that model model. Personally I believe the Penal substitution model causes a lot of the problems in Christianity. I also don't follow what the reformers said, because personally I think they had as much wrong as the Catholics that they were trying to reform. Kind of like what Jesus said, the blind leading the blind. I assume you hold to the Penal model because you keep speaking of God's Justice. You see here is one of the main problems with the Penal model. It says that Christ died on the cross as a payment to God for our sins. If this is the case then the debt is paid. The account is reconciled, this would mean we were no longer indebted to God. No longer accountable because the sin debt is paid. There would be no need for forgiveness. because the debt was paid. You don't forgive a debt that has already been paid. However, that is not what hte Bible teaches is it? The Scriptures tell us over and over again that God will forgive our sins, they don't say that God will demand justice for our sins. This is just one of a host of problems with the Penal model of the atonement.

I also don't hold to the governmental model.

 

[Robinson Crusoe]

My friend I don't hold to that model model. Personally I believe the Penal substitution model causes a lot of the problems in Christianity. I also don't follow what the reformers said, because personally I think they had as much wrong as the Catholics that they were trying to reform. Kind of like what Jesus said, the blind leading the blind. I assume you hold to the Penal model because you keep speaking of God's Justice. You see here is one of the main problems with the Penal model. It says that Christ died on the cross as a payment to God for our sins. If this is the case then the debt is paid. The account is reconciled, this would mean we were no longer indebted to God. No longer accountable because the sin debt is paid. There would be no need for forgiveness. because the debt was paid. You don't forgive a debt that has already been paid. However, that is not what hte Bible teaches is it? The Scriptures tell us over and over again that God will forgive our sins, they don't say that God will demand justice for our sins. This is just one of a host of problems with the Penal model of the atonement.

I also don't hold to the governmental model.

What "model" do you hold to?

 

[Robinson Crusoe]

In regards to the opening post, I was thinking about it today and, the obvious dawned on me! God requires blood sacrifice, because that is how He made things. So, I suppose one could ask, "why did God make things that way?" But of course, in all humility, we do not require an answer to that question; a slave should mind their place, in the master's house; so should we! If a slave's master requires seven pounds of gold for the life of the slave and the slave cannot pay it, then he must die. Of course, someone could pay the slave's life-price for him, but they may attach strings to the payment. The slave, unwilling to submit to those terms, would die and the slave who is willing, would not.

Uh oh, but here comes the scheisters. They offer alternative ways for the slave to escape death, without paying the seven pounds of gold. However, they are just preying on the slaves desperation, to fleece what little the slave has from him, before he dies or submits to the original terms. Some people call that "capitalism," but I call it lying.

On the other hand, Robinson Crusoe did make his escape from his Moorish Master, but his master was relatively weak and it still nearly cost Crusoe his life. How much more would it cost, if his master had been The Maker of All.

 

[Butch5]

Ok answer me this if god never wanted sacrifice than why did jesus come and die on the cross? why did god give us mercy and salvation through the bloody and brutal death of his son? Christ death wast pretty it was violent and it was grusome but god arranged it that way from the begining of time because he loves us and wants us to be saved. Ephesians 5:2, John 6:51, Galatians 2:20 Isaiah 53:7, Acts 8:32, Hebrews 10:10 and Hebrews 10:12.

And might i remind you that in the first five books of the bible that sacrifice was a law to be stricly obeyed, Leviticus 7:11 and Leviticus 7:37.

Hi Gumby,

I can answer your question because I do not hold to the Penal model of the atonement which says that Christ died to pay our sin debt to God. Rather I hold to the Classic or Ransom view of the atonement in which Christ is seen as a conqueror and redeemer. You see the OT sacrifices were types, they wee to show Israel to that an innocent one would suffer for the guilty. According to the Penal model it is God who requires payment for sins, it say since man wasn't able to make the payment Christ did. However, in the Classic view Adam and Eve, disobeyed God and obeyed Satan, thus falling under Satan's control. Since Adam and Eve were now slaves They needed to be redeemed, so Christ offered Himself to God as a sacrifice. Not like an animal sacrifice but like an heroic sacrifice. He offered to lay down his life in order to redeem that which was precious to God, mankind. So, It wasn't God who was the cause of the horrible death, it was Satan. Christ died for our sins as ransom to redeem mankind not as a payment ot God like the Penal model portrays.

I hope this answers you question. I know it rather simplified and I haven't gone into great depth. I you have any questions, please, quest away.

What "model" do you hold to?

The Original model, the same one the western church held for the first 1000 years of church history and the one the eastern Church still holds to, the one the Ante-Nicene church held to, The Classic or Ransom model of the atonement.

In regards to the opening post, I was thinking about it today and, the obvious dawned on me! God requires blood sacrifice, because that is how He made things. So, I suppose one could ask, "why did God make things that way?" But of course, in all humility, we do not require an answer to that question; a slave should mind their place, in the master's house; so should we! If a slave's master requires seven pounds of gold for the life of the slave and the slave cannot pay it, then he must die. Of course, someone could pay the slave's life-price for him, but they may attach strings to the payment. The slave, unwilling to submit to those terms, would die and the slave who is willing, would not.

Uh oh, but here comes the scheisters. They offer alternative ways for the slave to escape death, without paying the seven pounds of gold. However, they are just preying on the slaves desperation, to fleece what little the slave has from him, before he dies or submits to the original terms. Some people call that "capitalism," but I call it lying.

On the other hand, Robinson Crusoe did make his escape from his Moorish Master, but his master was relatively weak and it still nearly cost Crusoe his life. How much more would it cost, if his master had been The Maker of All.

 

[gumby]

Hi Gumby,

I can answer your question because I do not hold to the Penal model of the atonement which says that Christ died to pay our sin debt to God. Rather I hold to the Classic or Ransom view of the atonement in which Christ is seen as a conqueror and redeemer. You see the OT sacrifices were types, they wee to show Israel to that an innocent one would suffer for the guilty. According to the Penal model it is God who requires payment for sins, it say since man wasn't able to make the payment Christ did. However, in the Classic view Adam and Eve, disobeyed God and obeyed Satan, thus falling under Satan's control. Since Adam and Eve were now slaves They needed to be redeemed, so Christ offered Himself to God as a sacrifice. Not like an animal sacrifice but like an heroic sacrifice. He offered to lay down his life in order to redeem that which was precious to God, mankind. So, It wasn't God who was the cause of the horrible death, it was Satan. Christ died for our sins as ransom to redeem mankind not as a payment ot God like the Penal model portrays.

I hope this answers you question. I know it rather simplified and I haven't gone into great depth. I you have any questions, please, quest away.



The Original model, the same one the western church held for the first 1000 years of church history and the one the eastern Church still holds to, the one the Ante-Nicene church held to, The Classic or Ransom model of the atonement.

Why do you say christ death was horrible? on the cross christ defeated death hell and the grave wich is satan true but in the beleivers eyes the death on the cross sybolizes beuty and mercy and compassion not fear and torment. Once eyes are opened we see through John 3:16 that god so loved the world that he gave his only son. Romans 5:8, Ephesians 2:4, 2nd Thessalonians 2:16, 1st John 4:10 and Revelation 1:5.

All these above scriptures represent gods mery and love shown, gods not angry with us if we follow his word the being that he was angry at was satan not the ones who follow christ.

 

[Butch5]

Why do you say christ death was horrible? on the cross christ defeated death hell and the grave wich is satan true but in the beleivers eyes the death on the cross sybolizes beuty and mercy and compassion not fear and torment. Once eyes are opened we see through John 3:16 that god so loved the world that he gave his only son. Romans 5:8, Ephesians 2:4, 2nd Thessalonians 2:16, 1st John 4:10 and Revelation 1:5.

All these above scriptures represent gods mery and love shown, gods not angry with us if we follow his word the being that he was angry at was satan not the ones who follow christ.

The wages of sin is death, Christ could have simply died for sins. It was not necessary for Him to suffer and to be beaten beyond recognition. It was horrible in the way that He died. I agree that what Christ did was heroic, It was a beautiful thing that He did. I was simply referring to His being beaten.

However, the point of my post was to show that this was at the hands of Satan, not God as the Penal model suggests.

 

[gumby]

The wages of sin is death, Christ could have simply died for sins. It was not necessary for Him to suffer and to be beaten beyond recognition. It was horrible in the way that He died. I agree that what Christ did was heroic, It was a beautiful thing that He did. I was simply referring to His being beaten.

However, the point of my post was to show that this was at the hands of Satan, not God as the Penal model suggests.

I will say this much on the subject, i beleive it was satans entintion to test jesus and to break up his following. However it was gods intintion and plan to let his own son die on the cross to defeat satan and he did.

God bless :)

 

[Butch5]

I will say this much on the subject, i beleive it was satans entintion to test jesus and to break up his following. However it was gods intintion and plan to let his own son die on the cross to defeat satan and he did.

God bless :)

Yes, God did ahve a plan and yes Christ did willingly die for man.

 

[bling]

Because many people are turned off to God because of how they view Him in the Bible -as wrathful, mean, cruel, etc,---and
ask me many questions about all the contradictions found in the Bible ---help me with an answer about:

Why would a loving Father want blood from innocents? His little innocent creatures, lambs, His Son...?

Quoting the Bible doesn't count because they reject such "nonsense".
Their brains want to logically "get" ---W-H-Y?

Any help? If you say go to Hebrews 9 - it doesn't help them. It does not answer the question why?

Then, they don't want to believe in a God that would put His Son thru being a Blood Sacrifice.
Purposely, they reject the thought of such a Father as this.

What is in the mind of God that He likes lambs killed? Or does He? Is it a made up ritual of early Man's?
I need logic. Is there any?

Thanks,
:) Miss Hepburn

I hope you all have not given up because I want to present my alternative.
Miss Hepburn, It sounds like you might have confronted some Muslims because they like to point out that Allah does not need human sacrifices to forgive sin.
I have discussed this often with them and found a lot of issues with all the traditional explanations.
Main issues:
 The Muslim God does not need a human sacrifice to forgive sin.
 Punishing the innocent instead of punishing the guilty is unjust and not logical.
 One of the ways we know we are Children is because we are disciplined (punished) and punishment of the guilty has benefit.
Butch5 goes all the way back to the third century with Origen’s ideas (ransom), but that elevates satan and where are the Bible verses that support it?
God does not “need” anything, but everything He does is for our sake and not His.
God Loves me and wants me to benefit from being punished:
 a. Deterrent to crime
 b. Measures the offence (the greater the offence the greater the punishment)
 c. Shows you are truly a child because parents see to it that their children are punished (disciplined) for their crimes.
 d. It is fair and just, there needs to be consistency.
 e. There is closure with punishment (You do the time for the crime and you can move on).
The problem is to show how bad sin is, would require severe punishment which I could not physically survive. So is there a way for me to be severely punished and not be physically punished beyond my ability:

(I had a cartoon here that did not copy)

Christ going to the cross provide another way for us to be punished without us physically taking the punishment for our sins, but we were still punished so He is not taking our punishment away, but allowing for a different form of punishment. Christ being physically punished meant that we did not have to be physically punished.
God is not doing the punishing of Christ but disciples of satan unjustly tortured and murdered Christ.
The severity of our punishment is in proportion to our love for Christ, so the nonbeliever receives no punishment while here on earth.
The only way we keep from getting overwhelmed with depression about the cross is the tremendous Love that is shown by both God and Jesus.
 Since we have received the benefits from being punished than God can mercifully forgive us. If forgiveness came before the punishment it would not be fair to punish us.
The act of forgiveness has to come after the punishment or we would not deserve to be punished and is really separate from the cross, but the cross enables God to forgive.

Miss Hepburn this is the logic without any scripture.

 

[thereistruth]

Miss H, I appreciate your question, and it is a very common one asked by atheists. They tend to see it from one perspective, and that is that if God is all loving (which is the real heart of the issue with atheists, otherwise they would believe in God), then why does he seem to portray himself as unnecessarily cruel and unjust (ie. punishing the inocent instead of the guilty).

The answer is to be found in three primary realities:

1. The absolute love and loveliness of God, and his total good will toward us. This is the basis of creation itself. The universe, the Earth and all of nature was created for our pleasure and joy. And God himself wanted to dwell with us in this creation for ever. At the time of creation there was no death, no sin and no punishment for sin. This only came about because of sin.

2. The consequences of sin. We as humans cannot adequately fathom the hideous nature of sin. We always under-rate it's impact and the devastation it causes wherever it is found. We instinctively want to hide from the reality that we are sinners. We debate with God (sub consciously most of the time) that we aren't really all that bad, and that our good works outweigh our failures and wrongs. In other words we are in denial about the devastation that is wreaked by us and by the human race as a whole on each other, on the creation, and ON GOD HIMSELF! We simply do not consider the pain and suffering we cause God through our sin, which is greater than any that could ever be experienced by any sinful human being.

3. The remedy for sin. This is explained clearly in the bible. The reality is that sin is so destructive that the only adequate punishment for it is death. Any sin. After all what is sin? It is the destruction of the loving and trust-filled relationship between God and his creatures (specifically us, humans). We are unable to see the 'big deal' that sin is, but God does. We are comfortable with sin because we are used to it. We perpetrate it and witness it every day. We are like pigs who don't see the filth in their own pen. We are hardly the ones to judge how serious our sin is. But God is not like us. He alone is free from sin, and he alone sees the totality of the destructiveness of it.

 

[thereistruth]

Sorry, I clicked on the submit button before I had finished.

So, the question is - what does God want to communicate to us through the rituals of blood sacrifice?

It is not about what God is 'pleased' with. God is not and has never been 'pleased' with sacrifices, in the sense that he gets any kind of pleasure out of seeing his creatures (animals are loved by God as much as we are) slaughtered. Rather it grieves God that this must happen.

However, what he wants to convey to us is some inkling of the consequences that sin has on the world. When my sin exacts the death of an inocent creature, I cannot easily ignore the message that my sin is grave and costly. When it is a gentle and inocent lamb, it is one thing. But when it is the death of the God-man Jesus Christ himself, that is altogether something else.

The question should be then - what is it about my sin that requires the devastating punishment of someone who has done nothing but love me and the world?

No other religion deals with this issue. Sin is not faced head on in any other religion or philosophy in the world. In the Old Testament and more fully in the New Testament alone is the absolute extent of the destructive nature of my sin made clear. I can only begin to understand the gravity of my sin when I realize that my wilful sin can only ultimately be dealt with by the death of God himself (in the human person Jesus Christ)! It is only his inocent blood that can make adequate payment for my sin.

The reality is this: if I sin and subsequently I am killed as punishment (as is just and fair) then God is satisfied that I have paid for my sin. But he is forever grieved that the relationship that he created me for with Him cannot be restored (because I am no more). However, if another life can be substituted for mine, and the punishment can be fully paid in this other's death, then God and I get the best of both worlds: that is, my sin is fully paid for, and because I am set free from the power of sin, God is able to restore the relationship he craves with me. This is the heart of the gospel (John 3:16).

This is the real message of the New Testament. It was hinted at in the Old Testament as a glorious day to be looked forward to, but the reality is in the advent of Christ. Sin is awful and hideously destructive, ultimately leading to the total destruction of the first creation. But in Christ, through his victorious death and resurrection, a new creation is being birthed that is better than the old creation because it is based not on innocence, but total and absolute forgiveness! And this forgiveness is not based on the whim of a God that just chooses to forgive, but on the basis of a legally binding reality - the payment of the sin of the world through the death of Christ, and made complete by the pouring forth of the Holy Spirit into our lives, made possible only because Jesus (being inocent and thus unworthy of death himself) was raised from the dead and lives to infuse us with his own nature through the indwelling Holy Spirit, who is working to bring us to maturity so that we will be ready to live in the new creation free from sin in all it's forms.

Not a short answer, but I think will answer your question.

 

[goob]

I don't know if my atheist friend would buy that - but it certainly is different than what most say.

I am impressed with quite a few of the posts in response to the original question posed here. I just feel like this should be added to this conversation - Without the desire for truth, I'm afraid all of this will fall upon deaf ears. Please know that I am not posting this with a shaking finger; but rather genuine concern for a fellow believer.

What I want to post won't fit. Sorry, but I'm new here. So I will have to leave it up to you to actually look this up. There are two places I think should be noted. The first is 1 COR 2 - the entire chapter. The other, is 2 COR 6:14 on.

 

[bling]

Miss H, I appreciate your question, and it is a very common one asked by atheists. They tend to see it from one perspective, and that is that if God is all loving (which is the real heart of the issue with atheists, otherwise they would believe in God), then why does he seem to portray himself as unnecessarily cruel and unjust (ie. punishing the inocent instead of the guilty).

The answer is to be found in three primary realities:

1. The absolute love and loveliness of God, and his total good will toward us. This is the basis of creation itself. The universe, the Earth and all of nature was created for our pleasure and joy. And God himself wanted to dwell with us in this creation for ever. At the time of creation there was no death, no sin and no punishment for sin. This only came about because of sin.

2. The consequences of sin. We as humans cannot adequately fathom the hideous nature of sin. We always under-rate it's impact and the devastation it causes wherever it is found. We instinctively want to hide from the reality that we are sinners. We debate with God (sub consciously most of the time) that we aren't really all that bad, and that our good works outweigh our failures and wrongs. In other words we are in denial about the devastation that is wreaked by us and by the human race as a whole on each other, on the creation, and ON GOD HIMSELF! We simply do not consider the pain and suffering we cause God through our sin, which is greater than any that could ever be experienced by any sinful human being.

3. The remedy for sin. This is explained clearly in the bible. The reality is that sin is so destructive that the only adequate punishment for it is death. Any sin. After all what is sin? It is the destruction of the loving and trust-filled relationship between God and his creatures (specifically us, humans). We are unable to see the 'big deal' that sin is, but God does. We are comfortable with sin because we are used to it. We perpetrate it and witness it every day. We are like pigs who don't see the filth in their own pen. We are hardly the ones to judge how serious our sin is. But God is not like us. He alone is free from sin, and he alone sees the totality of the destructiveness of it.

You might look at my post, because you are not answering why it is just and fair for an innocent person to be tortured to death instead of the guilty person.